Filed: Feb. 28, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 28, 2012
Summary: ORDER B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief District Judge. Plaintiff seeks to hold defendant Rasmussen in default for filing its answer two days late. There is, however, no showing of prejudice, and the Ninth Circuit disfavors defaults, holding that cases should be decided on the merits when possible. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470 , 1472 (9th Cir.1986); see also B2B CFO Partners, LLC v. Kaufman, 2011 WL 6297930 (D.Ariz. Dec. 16, 2011) (denying motion for default when answer filed one day late). For th
Summary: ORDER B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief District Judge. Plaintiff seeks to hold defendant Rasmussen in default for filing its answer two days late. There is, however, no showing of prejudice, and the Ninth Circuit disfavors defaults, holding that cases should be decided on the merits when possible. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470 , 1472 (9th Cir.1986); see also B2B CFO Partners, LLC v. Kaufman, 2011 WL 6297930 (D.Ariz. Dec. 16, 2011) (denying motion for default when answer filed one day late). For the..
More
ORDER
B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief District Judge.
Plaintiff seeks to hold defendant Rasmussen in default for filing its answer two days late. There is, however, no showing of prejudice, and the Ninth Circuit disfavors defaults, holding that cases should be decided on the merits when possible. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472 (9th Cir.1986); see also B2B CFO Partners, LLC v. Kaufman, 2011 WL 6297930 (D.Ariz. Dec. 16, 2011) (denying motion for default when answer filed one day late). For these reasons, the Court will deny the motion for default. Accordingly,
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the motion for default (docket no. 43) is DENIED.
